Dataset Information

Reanalysis of the physical and mental health summary scores of dialysis versus conservative care in older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a critical appraisal.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:Non-dialytic conservative care is argued to be a reasonable treatment alternative for dialysis in selected older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. We evaluated patient-relevant outcomes including health-related quality of life in a previous study. However, the scoring algorithm we used to calculate the physical and mental component summary scores of the Short Form-36 (SF-36) turned out to differ from comparable studies on this topic. The aim of this critical appraisal was to reanalyze the SF-36 summary scores in our patient cohort (≥ 70 years) using the more widely used scoring algorithm. RESULTS:Patients on conservative care (n = 23) had lower physical and mental component summary scores compared to patients not yet started on dialysis (n = 39), but similar compared to patients on dialysis (n = 34). These findings were similar to our original findings and did not change the conclusions. Several scoring algorithms are used for the SF-36 summary scores. Researchers should be aware of this fact and should use the same scoring algorithm across similar studies in a specific field to increase comparability. Using the more widely used scoring algorithm, the recalculated SF-36 summary scores of our patient cohort can now be compared to other studies.

SUBMITTER: Verberne WR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6829838 | biostudies-other | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reanalysis of the physical and mental health summary scores of dialysis versus conservative care in older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a critical appraisal.

Verberne Wouter R WR Dijkers Janneke J Kelder Johannes C JC Jellema Wilbert T WT van Delden Johannes J M JJM Bos Willem Jan W WJW

BMC research notes 20191104 1

<h4>Objective</h4>Non-dialytic conservative care is argued to be a reasonable treatment alternative for dialysis in selected older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. We evaluated patient-relevant outcomes including health-related quality of life in a previous study. However, the scoring algorithm we used to calculate the physical and mental component summary scores of the Short Form-36 (SF-36) turned out to differ from comparable studies on this topic. The aim of this critical apprai ...[more]

PMID: 31685021

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Conservative care is argued to be a reasonable treatment alternative for dialysis in older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, comparisons are scarce and generally focus on survival only. Comparative data on more patient-relevant outcomes are needed to truly foster shared decision-making on an individual level, and cost comparison is needed to assess value of care. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective observational single-center cohort study in 366 patients aged ≥70 years with advanced CKD, who chose dialysis (n = 240) or conservative care (n = 126) after careful counselling by a multidisciplinary team in a non-academic teaching hospital in The Netherlands. Using a value-based health care approach (value = outcomes/cost): survival, health-related quality of life-cross-sectionally assessed with the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form™-treatment burden, and treatment costs were evaluated. RESULTS:The overall survival benefit of patients on a dialysis pathway compared with patients on conservative care diminished or lost significance in patients aged ≥80 years or with severe comorbidity. There were no differences between patients managed conservatively and dialysis patients on physical and mental health summary scores (all P > 0.1). Patients on conservative care had 352.7 hospital free days per year versus 282.7 in patients on a dialysis pathway, calculated from treatment decision (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.09 to 1.21, P < 0.001). Annual treatment costs were lower in patients on conservative care (adjusted cost ratio: 0.43, 95% confidence interval: 0.28 to 0.67, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:In this study, conservative care is shown to be a viable treatment option in older patients with advanced CKD, particularly in the oldest old and those with severe comorbidity. By achieving similar outcomes at lower treatment burden and treatment costs, value was generated for older patients choosing conservative care and society.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 may be offered a choice between dialysis and conservative management. Few studies have explored patients' reasons for choosing conservative management and none have compared the views of those who have chosen different treatments across renal units.Study designQualitative study with semistructured interviews.Settings & participantsPatients 75 years or older recruited from 9 renal units. Units were chosen to reflect variation in the scale of delivery of conservative management.MethodologySemistructured interviews audiorecorded and transcribed verbatim.Analytical approachData were analyzed using thematic analysis.Results42 interviews were completed, 4 to 6 per renal unit. Patients were sampled from those receiving dialysis, those preparing for dialysis, and those choosing conservative management. 14 patients in each group were interviewed. Patients who had chosen different treatments held varying beliefs about what dialysis could offer. The information that patients reported receiving from clinical staff differed between units. Patients from units with a more established conservative management pathway were more aware of conservative management, less often believed that dialysis would guarantee longevity, and more often had discussed the future with staff. Some patients receiving conservative management reported that they would have dialysis if they became unwell in the future, indicating the conditional nature of their decision.LimitationsRecruitment of older adults with frailty and comorbid conditions was difficult and therefore transferability of findings to this population is limited.ConclusionsOlder adults with chronic kidney disease stage 5 who have chosen different treatment options have contrasting beliefs about the likely outcomes of dialysis for those who are influenced by information provided by renal units. Supporting renal staff in discussing conservative management as a valid alternative to dialysis for a subset of patients will aid informed decision making. There is a need for better evidence about conservative management to support shared decision making for older people with chronic kidney failure.

Project description:BackgroundMany older patients approaching end-stage kidney disease have to decide whether to go for dialysis or non-dialytic conservative care (CC). Shared decision-making is recommended to align the treatment plan with the patient's preferences and values. Little is known about older patients' experiences with shared decision-making on dialysis or CC.MethodsWe performed a survey study, in collaboration with the Dutch Kidney Patients Association, in 99 patients aged ≥70 years who had chosen dialysis (n = 75) or CC (n = 24) after a shared decision-making process involving an experienced multidisciplinary team.ResultsPatients stated to be overall satisfied with the shared decision-making process (% with score 6-10 on 11-point Likert scale, dialysis versus CC: 93% vs. 91%, P = 0.06), and treatment decision (87% vs. 91%, P = 0.03). However, patients also reported negative experiences, especially those who had chosen dialysis. Such negative experiences were related to the timing, informing, and level of decision-making being shared. More patients who selected dialysis indicated to have felt forced to make a decision, mostly due to the circumstances, such as their deteriorating health or kidney function, or by their nephrologist (31% vs. 5%, P = 0.01). Also, patients who selected dialysis mentioned a perceived lack of choice as most common reason for choosing dialysis, and 55% considered their own opinion as most important rather than their nephrologists' or relatives' opinion compared to 90% of the patients who had chosen CC (P = 0.02). A subset of patients who had chosen dialysis still doubted their treatment decision compared to no patient who had chosen CC (17% vs. 0%, P = 0.03).ConclusionsOlder patients reported contrasting experiences with shared decision-making on dialysis or CC. Despite high overall satisfaction, the underlying negative experiences illustrate important but modifiable barriers to an optimal shared decision-making process.

Project description:BackgroundRoutine admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) following brain tumor surgery has been a common practice for many years. Although this practice has been challenged by many authors, it has still not changed widely, mainly due to the lack of reliable data for preoperative risk assessment. Motivated by this dilemma, risk prediction scores for postoperative complications following brain tumor surgery have been developed recently. In order to improve the ICU admission policy at our institution, we assessed the applicability, performance, and safety of the two most appropriate risk prediction scores.MethodsOne thousand consecutive adult patients undergoing elective brain tumor resection within 19 months were included. Patients with craniotomy for other causes, i.e., cerebral aneurysms and microvascular decompression, were excluded. The decision for postoperative ICU-surveillance was made by joint judgment of the operating surgeon and the anesthesiologist. All data and features relevant to the scores were extracted from clinical records and subsequent ICU or neurosurgical floor documentation was inspected for any postoperative adverse events requiring ICU admission. The CranioScore derived by Cinotti et al. (Anesthesiology 129(6):1111-20, 5) and the risk assessment score of Munari et al. (Acta Neurochir (Wien) 164(3):635-641, 15) were calculated and prognostic performance was evaluated by ROC analysis.ResultsIn our cohort, both scores showed only a weak prognostic performance: the CranioScore reached a ROC-AUC of 0.65, while Munari et al.'s score achieved a ROC-AUC of 0.67. When applying the recommended decision thresholds for ICU admission, 64% resp. 68% of patients would be classified as in need of ICU surveillance, and the negative predictive value (NPV) would be 91% for both scores. Lowering the thresholds in order to increase patient safety, i.e., 95% NPV, would lead to ICU admission rates of over 85%.ConclusionPerformance of both scores was limited in our cohort. In practice, neither would achieve a significant reduction in ICU admission rates, whereas the number of patients suffering complications at the neurosurgical ward would increase. In future, better risk assessment measures are needed.

Dataset Information

Reanalysis of the physical and mental health summary scores of dialysis versus conservative care in older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a critical appraisal.

Publications

Reanalysis of the physical and mental health summary scores of dialysis versus conservative care in older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: a critical appraisal.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets